Subject: Re: [lojban] To clarify...

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:26:52 -0500 (EST)

And Rosta scripsit:

> It's interesting that there is such near-unanimity (among those
> who care about design issues) that the morphology is a disaster
> and that shorter gismu and no rafsi would have been a much better
> solution. 

I at least don't agree. All alternative morphologies known to me
abandon either self-segregating words or self-segregating morphemes,
usually at the expense of making everything isolating and abandoning
the tanru/lujvo distinction, which IMHO is essential to Loglan.

The only exception is Nora's idea of reserving a vowel for
"end of brivla". I experimented with a variant of this in 
my conlang xuxuxi, where there is vowel harmony in all syllables except the
last, which is "antiharmonic".

Anyway, if you want Gua\spi, you know where to find it.

-- 
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [email-masked]
Please leave your values | Check your assumptions. In fact,
at the front desk. | check your assumptions at the door.
--sign in Paris hotel | --Miles Vorkosigan